Comments on: Sarah’s Critics Are Reading Her, and History, Wrong.

By: smitty

smitty — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:38:04 +0000

Jimmie, I'm interested in feedback on my feedback from this 06July post, but if you've given it, I've missed it. Thanks, Chris.

By: Flu-Bird

Flu-Bird — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:00:03 +0000

She comes from ALASKA one of the most conservative state we have and of the leftists scumballs dont like it TELL THEM TO GO HAUL STONES TO NEWCASTLE

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 22:15:10 +0000

You're right that I don't know whether the GOP is threatened by Palin. I suspect the party itself is not. However, I do know that people inside the GOP are treating Palin like she's a threat. I suspect that's because she came out of nowhere to become the most popular Republican in the country with the grassroots (the people who do the "ground operations" every election cycle) and the party had next to nothing to do with it.

My hostility toward the NRSC is that is continues to embrace a losing strategy when it comes to a coherent messages. The committee backs candidates that you and I both know will cause no end of trouble if they get elected (Arlen Specter ring a bell?). Crist is one of those candidates. What made his case even worse is that the NRSC endorsed him so early in the cycle that it has no good position when he turns out to be a dud.

By: Brad S

Brad S — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:45:43 +0000

Jimmie, I asked my question because you, and others, make certain assumptions that the GOP is threated by Sarah. You don't know that anymore than I do. And frankly, I suspect the RNC will be as close to supporting Sarah as possible without making official statements in favor of her. Which is fair to folks like Mitt Romney, as it avoids the appearance of favoritism toward other candidates like Sarah.

I don't know what you enduring hostility is toward committees like the NRSC. All that committee, and its counterpart in the House, does is pool money together to help get more Republicans elected to the House and Senate. And, regretfully, it's become a near full-time job for the Congressman/Senator that leads that committee. And yes, it's going to show something of a bias toward candidates that have more money in the game than the supposed "bloggers" favorite (cough, Crist/Rubio, cough cough).

By: Awww. | Little Miss Attila

Awww. | Little Miss Attila — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:10:16 +0000

[...] got a fairly reasonable entry/roundup up on the Palin strategy that’s good (despite having a rather inexplicable slam against me [...]

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 13:00:19 +0000

You really don't have any clue who could compose the GOP establishment? I'll give you a hint. You can find them spending more time establishing the power base of the party than ensuring that the principles of the party are sound (c.f. the NRSC). You can also find them aplenty in the RNC, as the folks who steadfastly resisted any change to how the GOP does business.

I'll throw in a few pundits as well, who have quite a bit of access thanks to long relationships with career politicians. I think Fred Barnes would qualify there, which might well explain why he'd suggest that the best Republican nominee looks more like John McCain than Sarah Palin.

By: Brad S

Brad S — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:25:19 +0000

May I ask just one simple question: Who is this "GOP Establishment" you speak of? And please name names; we really don't want to get into a position where folks, faced with the wrath of Sarah's fanbase, say "Really, I know you don't mean me; it's that guy right there. That man behind the tree."

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:19:46 +0000

Guys, for what it's worth, I don't think Anna Lisa is a liberal. Her concerns aren't all that unusual. Folks have come to expect a certain erudition in our Presidents and I think that's fine.

On the other hand, Anna, I'd note that a pleasant voice and nice words do not necessarily translate into coherent policy.